This is similar to the allocfn case - if an alloca is not captured, then it's
necessarily thread-local.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D28170
llvm-svn: 290738
Summary:
Make isGuaranteedToExecute use the
isGuaranteedToTransferExecutionToSuccessor helper, and make that helper
a bit more accurate.
There's a potential performance impact here from assuming that arbitrary
calls might not return. This probably has little impact on loads and
stores to a pointer because most things alias analysis can reason about
are dereferenceable anyway. The other impacts, like less aggressive
hoisting of sdiv by a variable and less aggressive hoisting around
volatile memory operations, are unlikely to matter for real code.
This also impacts SCEV, which uses the same helper. It's a minor
improvement there because we can tell that, for example, memcpy always
returns normally. Strictly speaking, it's also introducing
a bug, but it's not any worse than everywhere else we assume readonly
functions terminate.
Fixes http://llvm.org/PR27857.
Reviewers: hfinkel, reames, chandlerc, sanjoy
Subscribers: broune, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D21167
llvm-svn: 272489
This patch teaches LICM's implementation of store promotion to exploit the fact that the memory location being accessed might be provable thread local. The fact it's thread local weakens the requirements for where we can insert stores since no other thread can observe the write. This allows us perform store promotion even in cases where the store is not guaranteed to execute in the loop.
Two key assumption worth drawing out is that this assumes a) no-capture is strong enough to imply no-escape, and b) standard allocation functions like malloc, calloc, and operator new return values which can be assumed not to have previously escaped.
In future work, it would be nice to generalize this so that it works without directly seeing the allocation site. I believe that the nocapture return attribute should be suitable for this purpose, but haven't investigated carefully. It's also likely that we could support unescaped allocas with similar reasoning, but since SROA and Mem2Reg should destroy those, they're less interesting than they first might seem.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16783
llvm-svn: 263072
Adam Nemet